Cardano is still UTXO based isn’t it? Would be interesting to see if Cardano could benefit from Zendoo considering if I recall correctly IOHK having a hand in R&D?
1 Like
We have long shared a cryptography research team with IOHK/Cardano. I remember they had their own sidechain protocol, but I haven’t stayed plugged in enough to know the differences. But, hey, everything we did is open source and anyone can incorporate it anywhere.
2 Likes
I think there was mention of Wanchain having some role in a sidechain solution developing within Cardano in the past 6-12 months but currently they are mainly bridging blue chip assets (BTC, ETH, USDC, USDT, DAI) and whitelisted assets for use on about half a dozen of the DeFi apps within Cardano ecosystem - perhaps I can go dig across the pond to find a can of beans to spill on what else is in the works
1 Like
Hi, I am MJ in korea community,
I want to approach the POW algorithm from a humanities perspective. the reward concept for mining is the priority for the POW algorithm first. the reward is linked to the price aspect after all. However, the reward from the POW is not attractive in the current aspect, so I don’t think the POW is suitable for ZEN.Since there are not many participants. If it is a system that gives 100% reward to the miner and provides support in terms of price, the story may be different, but I don’t think I can expect it now. So I don’t think it’s suitable for ZEN as the current situation. The unit price of the reward is lower than the electric energy I use. So I think the transition to POS is right.
2 Likes
No,no,Disagree with POS, as it will cause a change in total volume and exacerbate inflation. Violating the original intention of encryption. Pow is the purest, and the ecological start of BTC-BRC20 is a good start.
1 Like
Do you have a proposition to keep a POW mainchain and be more scalable and fast?
Why do you think that will cause a volume change? Tokenomics won’t change.
Many of the POS projects I saw before have disappeared, the total supply of tokens is constantly changing, the ecology is not improving, but a lot of nodes are doing nothing and lying down to earn profits. Like eos, there is no ecosystem, but tokens are inflating fiercely. This is just my superficial understanding.
1 Like
These concerns have been addressed. We will keep the same tokenomics (we can even keep the halvings, something you don’t see often on POS chains), so the total supply can’t change.
It is feasible to keep the total supply unchanged and switch to POS. But how should limited supply be allocated？
1 Like
Sorry, just saw that. The reward per block should change because we will have more blocks created than before.
We still can have halvings as well. It’s just something to configure.
1 Like
exactly, we’d want to fit the new emission schedule to the original supply curve. Faster blocks, but fewer $ZEN per block; same total supply and approximated schedule.
2 Likes
Hi team.
216,000(?) ZEN are being mined per month.
When changing POS, my question is
- how many ZEN will be generated per month?
- is there any meaning of halving?
2 Likes
I think it is 6.25 x 24 x 24 x 30 = 108,000 ZEN per 30 days
Next halving would be in December 2024, and it would reduce to 54,000 per 30 days
The emission schedule would be just about the same after transition to PoS, there has been no proposal or vote to change the ZEN emission schedule
3 Likes
I appreciate your answer @blockops Rolf.
I think this story will make holders who were against the POS change feel a little more positive about it.
There are still many misconceptions about POS
- It is easy to change the total supply.
A: 51% agreement and overwhelming community support required. - There is no effect of halving
A: Rolf’s answer.
Thanks for clearing up the misconceptions.
3 Likes